These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Crius] Starbase feedback

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Zaxix
State War Academy
Caldari State
#301 - 2014-07-10 16:11:34 UTC
If I could ask one thing of the Devs in relation to the various avenues of feedback and announcements, it would be this:

For the love of God, could you please get all of the information into ONE place? I had to learn about the roll back of the stacking changes through TMC. You've got multiple threads up through the dev blogs, mutliple threads up in features and ideas, and, apparently, threads in the Test Server feedback. Can you please pull things together in such a way that players don't have to go to a bunch of different places to figure out what's going on? Maybe consider information streams that aren't categorized based on sub-forum layouts?

This isn't the first time I've learned about stuff through out of eve news sources because the information dissemination methods are so byzantine. It's very frustrating.

Thanks for listening.

Bokononist

 
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
#302 - 2014-07-10 16:12:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Niko Lorenzio
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Genoir wrote:
A little confused here.

This means that I'll now be paying an addition 500m+ a month for the pos on top of the taxes I would pay in station but receive no additional benefit for the additional isk I pay out?


So starbase changes as a whole are specified in this blog here: http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/starbase-changes-for-crius/

As per my earlier post, the section entitled "Structure cost scaling" has been cut, but everything else stands.

Most notable benefits that you still have for using a starbase in hisec:
- No NPC tax on the job cost (10% in NPC stations)
- Time multipliers between 0.7x and 0.5x for various research job types
- 0.75x time multiplier and 0.98x material multiplier for build jobs in most structures

The messaging on this has not been sufficiently clear because we (I) have been viewing the multiple-structure bonus as an additional little extra rather than a core balance driver, and weren't expecting people to view it as a make-or-break bonus in comparison to the above list. Sorry for not being clearer about this sooner :)


Not make-or-break? Let's consider cons and pros of doing industry in a POS vs Station.

Station:
+Absolutely safety
+Ease of use
+High mobility (easy to pack up and move operation 1-10 jumps out for lower prices)
+Immune to wardecs (using alts or couriers for hauling)
-10% NPC tax on fees
-Having to pay office rent (although most POS owners use offices too)

POS:
+No 10% NPC tax on fees
+2% ME reduction (for manu only)
+0.5-0.75 time reduction on all activities.
-Fuel costs ranging from 100-500m.
-Significant increase in maintenance & operational logistics
-Inability to rely on alts/couriers for distribution.
-Major PITA to relocate to a different system with lower fees.
-Operations interrupted by wardecs (can't get to the POS to do industry)
-Significant increase in risk of losing billions worth of POS assets, materials and Blueprints (BPOs can be saved but BPCs in production & the rest are screwed).
-Hard to defend as the attacker chooses if, when and where to strike.
-Invitation for wardecs (Big static object screaming "We do industry here, come shoot at us!")

I see lots of risk but very little reward. And with this latest announcement, it's just disheartening.

The excuse that we can't work around online/offline shenanigans is just silly and another example of CCP punishing everyone because of some predicted bad behavior. I honestly can't imagine too many people adding "sitting at a POS onlining/offlining crap before installing industry jobs" to their activity. If there was a point in offlining labs/arrays, that means they need that PG/CPU for other stuff, like defenses, and that many batteries take hours to online . So yeah, I can maybe see it on months long production jobs like super caps & caps in LS, but otherwise it shouldn't be an issue at all.

And increasing the fitting requirements of labs/arrays is going to be another downside. POS are pretty soft targets as it is. Having to shut-down your entire production in order to ensure minimum safety for your POS every time you get a wardec is insane. You don't know whether they're after your POS or not, and by the time you find out it's too late to offline/online anything. The POS will be already in reinforced or the batteries will be shot down as you're onlining them.

I know CCP loves to troll us, but c'mon, have some decency and respect.

The CSM XI Election are now open until March 25th, 2016. Consider Niko Lorenzio for CSM XI.

CSM matters, your voice matters, your vote matters!
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#303 - 2014-07-10 16:14:35 UTC  |  Edited by: MailDeadDrop
Niko Lorenzio wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:
I know that the POS code is supposedly a mess, but please stop using that as an excuse to avoid fixing it. Everyone knows they're broken and simply reminding us of how broken they are instead of doing the work to fix them is highly unprofessional in my book. There's a lot of good gameplay to be had there if you just fixed them.


Fixing POS code is next on our list after industry, as per the EVE Keynote at Fanfest this year.


I thought it was corp management?

They've also said invention and reverse engineering are next on their list. One can only hope that, given there are multiple devs and multiple dev teams, that all three are worked simultaneously and released as they are finished(*).

MDD
(*) Yeah, yeah, I know nothing in Eve is ever truly finished...
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#304 - 2014-07-10 16:23:32 UTC
Zaxix wrote:
If I could ask one thing of the Devs in relation to the various avenues of feedback and announcements, it would be this:

For the love of God, could you please get all of the information into ONE place? I had to learn about the roll back of the stacking changes through TMC. You've got multiple threads up through the dev blogs, mutliple threads up in features and ideas, and, apparently, threads in the Test Server feedback. Can you please pull things together in such a way that players don't have to go to a bunch of different places to figure out what's going on? Maybe consider information streams that aren't categorized based on sub-forum layouts?

This isn't the first time I've learned about stuff through out of eve news sources because the information dissemination methods are so byzantine. It's very frustrating.

Thanks for listening.


We are planning a series of "release documentation" blogs prior to the release. Currently yes, everything is spread out while we fill in all the gaps, but we're aware of this and planning on addressing it.

Niko Lorenzio wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Genoir wrote:
A little confused here.

This means that I'll now be paying an addition 500m+ a month for the pos on top of the taxes I would pay in station but receive no additional benefit for the additional isk I pay out?


So starbase changes as a whole are specified in this blog here: http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/starbase-changes-for-crius/

As per my earlier post, the section entitled "Structure cost scaling" has been cut, but everything else stands.

Most notable benefits that you still have for using a starbase in hisec:
- No NPC tax on the job cost (10% in NPC stations)
- Time multipliers between 0.7x and 0.5x for various research job types
- 0.75x time multiplier and 0.98x material multiplier for build jobs in most structures

The messaging on this has not been sufficiently clear because we (I) have been viewing the multiple-structure bonus as an additional little extra rather than a core balance driver, and weren't expecting people to view it as a make-or-break bonus in comparison to the above list. Sorry for not being clearer about this sooner :)


Not make-or-break? Let's consider cons and pros of doing industry in a POS vs Station.

Station:
+Absolutely safety
+Ease of use
+High mobility (easy to pack up and move operation 1-10 jumps out for lower prices)
+Immune to wardecs (using alts or couriers for hauling)
-10% NPC tax on fees
-Having to pay office rent (although most POS owners use offices too)

POS:
+No 10% NPC tax on fees
+2% ME reduction (for manu only)
+0.5-0.75 time reduction on all activities.
-Fuel costs ranging from 100-500m.
-Significant increase in maintenance & operational logistics
-Inability to rely on alts/couriers for distribution.
-Major PITA to relocate to a different system with lower fees.
-Operations interrupted by wardecs (can't get to the POS to do industry)
-Significant increase in risk of losing billions worth of POS assets, materials and Blueprints (BPOs can be saved but BPCs in production & the rest are screwed).
-Hard to defend as the attacker chooses if, when and where to strike.
-Invitation for wardecs (Big static object screaming "We do industry here, come shoot at us!")

I see lots of risk but very little reward. And with this latest announcement, it's just disheartening.

The excuse that we can't work around online/offline shenanigans is just silly and another example of CCP punishing everyone because of some predicted bad behavior. I honestly can't imagine too many people adding "sitting at a POS onlining/offlining crap before installing industry jobs" to their activity. If there was a point in offlining labs/arrays, that means they need that PG/CPU for other stuff, like defenses, and that many batteries take hours to online . So yeah, I can maybe see it on months long production jobs like super caps & caps in LS, but otherwise it shouldn't be an issue at all.

And increasing the fitting requirements of labs/arrays is going to be another downside. POS are pretty soft targets as it is. Having to shut-down your entire production in order to ensure minimum safety for your POS every time you get a wardec is insane. You don't know whether they're after your POS or not, and by the time you find out it's too late to offline/online anything. The POS will be already in reinforced or the batteries will be shot down as you're onlining them.

I know CCP loves to troll us, but c'mon, have some decency and respect.


If the value proposition for industrial starbases is broken, then that is a thing that we can address much more directly and effectively through other channels, and it's absolutely something we're open to discussing.
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#305 - 2014-07-10 16:32:23 UTC  |  Edited by: MailDeadDrop
CCP Greyscale wrote:
If the value proposition for industrial starbases is broken, then that is a thing that we can address much more directly and effectively through other channels, and it's absolutely something we're open to discussing.

I read the underlined passage as a reference to another thread. Is that what you mean, Greyscale? If so, would you please link to the thread you'd rather move the "industrial POS value proposition" discussion? (Not being snarky here; text doesn't convey my sincerity).

MDD
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
#306 - 2014-07-10 16:54:33 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:

If the value proposition for industrial starbases is broken, then that is a thing that we can address much more directly and effectively through other channels, and it's absolutely something we're open to discussing.


All for this, but with the limited time we have to release, are we really going to achieve any meaningful results? If the stacking bonus code is already written and ready, why not implement it for now as is, until such time that a full POS revamp happens?

The CSM XI Election are now open until March 25th, 2016. Consider Niko Lorenzio for CSM XI.

CSM matters, your voice matters, your vote matters!
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
#307 - 2014-07-10 18:35:30 UTC
Sigras wrote:
the ROI on POS modules does seem a bit poor...

its probably a bit out of scope now, but a while ago i posted a suggestion that allows corps to grow the number of arrays organically as they can now; it also fixes the online/offline problem...

Give all POS arrays a 10% reduction to job cost then make the job 1% more expensive per job in that array.

the obvious FOO strategy is one array per job of that type you want to run, but this runs into CPU issues and requires more shuffling around of materials, so you have tradeoffs.

the other idea i had was to give each type of array a "job cost reducer" module with a long-ish online time to prevent online/offline shenanigans

the added advantage to this approach is that you can make it cost appropriate so the ROI isnt insane and youre not messing with assembly array's online timers...

thoughts?


Encouraging to split up production into several arrays is a terrible idea. If you ever dealt with such production you would know. As stated before, I really doubt anyone would waste time with online/offline crap except capital producers in lowsec. Unfortunately I cannot think of any good solutions to that problem atm but scrapping the entire thing because of that is.... unnerving.

The CSM XI Election are now open until March 25th, 2016. Consider Niko Lorenzio for CSM XI.

CSM matters, your voice matters, your vote matters!
Alexander McKeon
Perkone
Caldari State
#308 - 2014-07-10 18:44:46 UTC
Until Crius, much of the value of having a POS has been associated with the availability of copy slots; the ones in NPC stations are a severe bottleneck in the production pipeline. Additionally, the POS has provided a risk-free way to copy / research BPOs that stayed safely in corporate hangers.

Post-Crius the value of overcoming limited NPC copy slots has been eliminated and we've moved from risk-free time reduction to risk-intensive time reduction from POS labs. The relative value proposition for industrial starbases (fuel prices aren't going down!) as compared to stations has taken a severe beating with precious little to offset it.
Kasigi Yono
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#309 - 2014-07-10 18:53:41 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:
I know that the POS code is supposedly a mess, but please stop using that as an excuse to avoid fixing it. Everyone knows they're broken and simply reminding us of how broken they are instead of doing the work to fix them is highly unprofessional in my book. There's a lot of good gameplay to be had there if you just fixed them.


Fixing POS code is next on our list after industry, as per the EVE Keynote at Fanfest this year.


I'll believe it when I see it.
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
#310 - 2014-07-10 18:57:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Niko Lorenzio
Letto Atreides wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Hi everyone,

Update on multiple-structure bonuses for starbases.

We've just had another discussion about this system as-implemented, and based on your feedback, the technical challenges involved in implementing it in a fully user-friendly way, and the somewhat limited upsides of the feature, we've decided to cut it from Crius.

Having multiple starbase structures of the same type at a starbase will no longer grant you any bonus above those inherent in the structure itself

The only substantial downside to this is that it makes it much easier to weaponize an industry tower, so we are considering upping lab/array fitting costs substantially in a later release. We likely will not do this in Crius itself as people will need time to reconfigure their setups.

We are looking into what we can do to mitigate the expected glut of labs resulting from this change; more info as we work through this process :)

Thanks for all your feedback,
-Greyscale


Great Decision! Thanks for listening to all the player feedback.

For those of you that are writing angry posts in response to this decision, please consider how tedious your life would have become managing 13 arrays to get the same bonus.


I think you misunderstood the post. 13 Equipment Assembly Arrays would give you 6.5% reduction in manufacturing fees. Now it will only give you 0.5% reduction. Having 20-25% reduction in manufacturing fees vs 0.5% is a big deal.

Also there's nothing to manage. Anchor, online and that's it. All the production happens in one array.

The CSM XI Election are now open until March 25th, 2016. Consider Niko Lorenzio for CSM XI.

CSM matters, your voice matters, your vote matters!
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#311 - 2014-07-10 19:07:30 UTC
Alexander McKeon wrote:
Until Crius, much of the value of having a POS has been associated with the availability of copy slots; the ones in NPC stations are a severe bottleneck in the production pipeline. Additionally, the POS has provided a risk-free way to copy / research BPOs that stayed safely in corporate hangers.

Post-Crius the value of overcoming limited NPC copy slots has been eliminated and we've moved from risk-free time reduction to risk-intensive time reduction from POS labs. The relative value proposition for industrial starbases (fuel prices aren't going down!) as compared to stations has taken a severe beating with precious little to offset it.


Given the risk involved, I don't see POS research as really viable anymore in any region where there are NPC station labs available. Sure, researching at a POS will likely save you ISK on install costs, as well as time, but is that savings worth the cost of keeping a POS fueled? Or the risk of potentially losing your BPO by having to keep it in the POS?

I say no.

Even POS manufacturing is of questionable benefit now. Yes, you will save ISK, materials, and time by building at a POS, but is that cost worth the fuel or the BPC copy time (or the risk of using a BPO)?

Again, I say no.

The only thing that I see a POS being potentially useful for now is refining and compressing as there is no risk to BPOs or time wasted copying BPCs. Unfortunately, while I feel that the stats on the new compression array are reasonable (they match a lab), the stats on the updated refining array are so high that you can't even use one in a small POS without severely limiting fitting.

CCP, if you're going to so severely limit the utility of POSes with Crius, could you at least throw us a bone and make the refining array have similar fittings to the compression array or a mobile lab?

Please?

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Jezza McWaffle
Lazerhawks
L A Z E R H A W K S
#312 - 2014-07-10 19:28:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Jezza McWaffle
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:
I know that the POS code is supposedly a mess, but please stop using that as an excuse to avoid fixing it. Everyone knows they're broken and simply reminding us of how broken they are instead of doing the work to fix them is highly unprofessional in my book. There's a lot of good gameplay to be had there if you just fixed them.


Fixing POS code is next on our list after industry, as per the EVE Keynote at Fanfest this year.


I will marry you! It is now a happening Cool

Wormholes worst badass | Checkout my Wormhole blog
scotayne hawkins
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#313 - 2014-07-10 19:31:28 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:
I know that the POS code is supposedly a mess, but please stop using that as an excuse to avoid fixing it. Everyone knows they're broken and simply reminding us of how broken they are instead of doing the work to fix them is highly unprofessional in my book. There's a lot of good gameplay to be had there if you just fixed them.


Fixing POS code is next on our list after industry, as per the EVE Keynote at Fanfest this year.


can we please have this thread lock for trolling,

in 8yrs i've heard POS's are getting changedthis can't be true so please notify a

ISD please lock this thread
Rekkr Nordgard
Steelforge Heavy Industries
#314 - 2014-07-10 20:07:21 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
If the value proposition for industrial starbases is broken, then that is a thing that we can address much more directly and effectively through other channels, and it's absolutely something we're open to discussing.


Oh, I'm sure you are. Open to discussing it and discussing it and discussing it and discussing it and discussing it ad nauseum, but actually fixing POSes is always in the next expansion.
Marsan
#315 - 2014-07-10 20:17:57 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:
I know that the POS code is supposedly a mess, but please stop using that as an excuse to avoid fixing it. Everyone knows they're broken and simply reminding us of how broken they are instead of doing the work to fix them is highly unprofessional in my book. There's a lot of good gameplay to be had there if you just fixed them.


Fixing POS code is next on our list after industry, as per the EVE Keynote at Fanfest this year.


Yea you guys have said that before, and we still haven't got private storage for ships yes....

Former forum cheerleader CCP, now just a grumpy small portion of the community.
Marsan
#316 - 2014-07-10 20:27:32 UTC
Niko Lorenzio wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:
I know that the POS code is supposedly a mess, but please stop using that as an excuse to avoid fixing it. Everyone knows they're broken and simply reminding us of how broken they are instead of doing the work to fix them is highly unprofessional in my book. There's a lot of good gameplay to be had there if you just fixed them.


Fixing POS code is next on our list after industry, as per the EVE Keynote at Fanfest this year.


I thought it was corp management?


Really I would think that corp management needs to be fixed 1st as one of the major issues with POSes is corporate roles. You have to be a complete idiot to do industry in a POS that isn't a corporation of one beyond compression and refining. It's near impossible to give a member of a corp the ability to anything meaningful with a POS without opening the rest of the corp to major risk.

Former forum cheerleader CCP, now just a grumpy small portion of the community.
Deeone
Deadspace Zombie Factory
#317 - 2014-07-10 20:35:42 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Hi everyone,

Update on multiple-structure bonuses for starbases.

We've just had another discussion about this system as-implemented, and based on your feedback, the technical challenges involved in implementing it in a fully user-friendly way, and the somewhat limited upsides of the feature, we've decided to cut it from Crius.

Having multiple starbase structures of the same type at a starbase will no longer grant you any bonus above those inherent in the structure itself

The only substantial downside to this is that it makes it much easier to weaponize an industry tower, so we are considering upping lab/array fitting costs substantially in a later release. We likely will not do this in Crius itself as people will need time to reconfigure their setups.

We are looking into what we can do to mitigate the expected glut of labs resulting from this change; more info as we work through this process :)

Thanks for all your feedback,
-Greyscale


So You are going to jack up the fitting reqs for the labs because of a change you guys decided not to make????? Jesus........Nothing changed but we are gonna nerf this because we thought about changing it and decided we didnt need to change it. But we want to make the labs harder to get on industry towers cuz why would you need to defend the BPOs you now have to keep in the tower........
Seith Kali
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#318 - 2014-07-10 20:49:29 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:

If the value proposition for industrial starbases is broken, then that is a thing that we can address much more directly and effectively through other channels, and it's absolutely something we're open to discussing.

Most stuff I will continue doing around jita will be in a POS. Even in null it is certainly preferable to use POS over upgrading outposts all over the place if usage costs threaten to get too high.

Let's not forget they are a steaming pile of shite to work with at the moment in general so one could argue mechanics that discourage their use are more than welcome.

Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege. 
Rekkr Nordgard
Steelforge Heavy Industries
#319 - 2014-07-10 21:01:54 UTC
Seith Kali wrote:
Let's not forget they are a steaming pile of shite to work with at the moment in general so one could argue mechanics that discourage their use are more than welcome.


Wow. So an important game mechanic is painful to use, fundamentally broken, and badly in need of fixing, so CCP should make it worse to discourage its use? lol

By that logic, CCP should introduce a mechanic where every hour one of the POS modules, chosen at random, in an online POS self-destructs and destroys itself and everything inside it. That would certainly "discourage" POS use.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#320 - 2014-07-10 21:18:12 UTC
Rekkr Nordgard wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
If the value proposition for industrial starbases is broken, then that is a thing that we can address much more directly and effectively through other channels, and it's absolutely something we're open to discussing.


Oh, I'm sure you are. Open to discussing it and discussing it and discussing it and discussing it and discussing it ad nauseum, but actually fixing POSes is always in the next expansion.


There's a substantial difference between "fixing POS" and "targeted buffs to POS industry viability". The former is measured in team-months, the latter is measured in developer-hours :)